So SpaceX is calling the system a “flame deflector”. I have to adjust my terminology!
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
The video in that tweet is very informative. The central area of water jets are angled out from the center but there is a surrounding ring of jets that point straight up. Interesting.
Any thoughts on that spray pattern? It looks like they're trying to create a cup shape with the water.
Assuming a spherical cow...
As we leave the center of the plate, the amount of exhaust to deal with increases as all engines vent to the outside.
If water flow is uniform over the area, without the vaporization effect, the quantity of water will also increase toward the outside creating a bowl effect.
The nozzle vectors help avoid pooling/ stagnation in the center and impingement on the engine bells. Lots of water uniformly heated is preferable to smaller quantities superheated.
The effect reminds me of the Merlin pintle injector where the fan hits the sheet.
willow_hiller
Well-Known Member
Awh, I was enjoying the backronyms people were suggesting in /r/spacex. Like:
Mega Orbital Ignition Suppression Torrent (M.O.I.S.T.)
Or
Booster Immolation Depressant Emanating Tool (B.I.D.E.T.)
Pressure from rocket exhaust is higher than 300 ft of water (150 psi). Water would quickly be displaced.
General structural requirements of OLM standing in a pond along with serviceability of OLM/ booster.
Jets continuously replenish the water which is there to keep the plate cool.
Far better that way than to have the final two nouns swapped.
I was keeping it clean for you.
CNBC reports
SpaceX hasn’t obtained environmental permits for ‘flame deflector’ system it’s testing in Texas
One more thing that could delay ITF-2. Obviously a massive amount of water runs off into the nearby wetlands nature reserve, you can see that in the system test videos. Apparently no details are available about exactly what that “industrial process wastewater” contains in terms of contaminants that, I assume, makes it unfit for human consumption.
This seems to be a constant thing with environmental groups and SpaceX. I never know if this is anything of actual concern or just more environmentalist alarmism. I get the impression that because the water passes through the pumps, pipes and metal grids, it qualifies as "industrial process wastewater", and so a "review" of this would result in somebody at the EPA rubber stamping the document. After a month of waiting. I suspect that SpaceX has gone the route of "It's easier to ask for forgiveness than permission". They can afford any fines that might be imposed for failure to file paperwork.
I got a kick out of this part of the article.
“We don’t know if there is any mechanism in place to make sure runoff is not reaching surrounding habitat,” he said. “They are clearly making changes to the launch site, and how they do their launches. There’s been no transparency on that, and no way for the public to see what those changes are or offer comment on them as the National Environment Policy Act requires.”
"(q) The term process waste water means any water which, during manufacturing or processing, comes into direct contact with or results from the production or use of any raw material, intermediate product, finished product, by-product, or waste product "
There is (arguably) neither processing nor product occurring.
Additionally, the FireX deluge system was already approved. Though at lower volumes, concept is similar.
https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CFR-2007-title40-vol28/pdf/CFR-2007-title40-vol28-part401.pdf
@mongo thanks for your post, I had neglected to consider the fact that during a launch almost all the water used by the flame diverter system will turn into steam and then will be widely dispersed in the surrounding atmosphere instead of pouring off the edge of the concrete covered launch area as we saw during the recent tests.
I assume that SpaceX can point out to the relevant authorities how that reality obviates the need to file for an environmental permit.
I assume that SpaceX can point out to the relevant authorities how that reality obviates the need to file for an environmental permit.
adiggs
Well-Known Member
The next launch, and presumably launches thereafter, are going to have the rocket rising up out of one heck of a big cloud of its own making.
How will this be a smaller cloud?
Now we have all the fumes from 33 engines burning at full throttle + all steam from FDS.
Almost twice as much fumes and no where to go but up !
I am worried SpaceX is trading one problem over another.
Similar threads
- Article
